Beta Testers
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

1,373 Superb


About Phoenix_jz

  • Rank
  • Birthday 02/02/1999
  • Portal profile Phoenix_jz

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Ammiraglio di 1° Divisione Incrociatori Pesanti
    -Italian Heavy Cruiser Ace-
    -Punk Rocker-
  • Portal profile Phoenix_jz

Recent Profile Visitors

782 profile views
  1. Well guys, this is me, signing off! I'll be back in 10 days, but until then, Happy Hunting!

    1. SparvieroVV


      Have fun storming the castle!




  2. Unfortunately, this will be the last response I'll be able to put out for the next ten days, so apologies in advance if it takes a while to reply to your next response - I do understand your doubt. I can't speak to the integrity of Okun's data, I can only go with what I observe from it (was looking at EFF figures). I would imagine most things that would be wildly inaccurate would've been weeded out, but I could easily be wrong (hi, Nelson). As for what causes the Model 1934's penetration to still somehow be so powerful even at range: I do not know what decisively makes the difference. Perhaps it was cap design? There is the none-to insignificant factor that it's a 381mm shell, and in any penetration formula you see, caliber is quite clearly in the denominator. A 381mm shell that weights 950kg would have better penetration than a 406mm shell with the same weight (obviously this does not account for all the difference in penetration, but I imagine it's a factor). As far as this: "This data is from "The Littorio Class: Italy's Last and Largest Battleships 1937 - 1948" for a muzzle velocity of 2,789 fps (850 mps) and is taken from official documents dated September 1942. I have corrected for typos in the data table." It is most likely incorrect in it's summary. I highly doubt it was conducted at 850mps, given that was the standard MV in September of 1942, and the caption from the book simply states: "These values are slightly lower than 'firing range' values, usually used to compare against equivalent weapons of other navies and for comparison are shown in the table below, probably with reference to a lower muzzle velocity and to more conservative estimates." This would seem to suggest sub-850mps velocities. I also have a copy of the relevant section of the documents referenced, and although perhaps I've missed something, I haven't seen a reference to the MV for those charts being 850mps (others have access to the document on the forums, perhaps they could give it a comb through? If not, I'll try to when I'm able, but that won't be for about two weeks). The table above it on the Navweaps page is based on 850mps. Whether it was based on the USN Emp. Formula or not, I don't know myself, but it also appears in Bagnasco's book, sourced from OTO Melara... And I do somewhat doubt the RM would've been using a USN formula just for kicks back then. Given the limited time for this response, that's all I can come up with, so I apologise. I do, by the way, aknowledge that it is quite possible Okun's tables could be incorrect.
  3. I mean... At least she's consistent?
  4. Outside of the crazy fire chance and damage of the HE... The penetration is the same as German BBs. Their ability to cit-pen stuff with HE isn't exactly a new thing.
  5. GM3D still shows 15 millisecond fuses... Oh well, ninja'd. Tbh I'm not a huge fan given the last thing the game needs is another line that excels even more than usual BB lines at killing cruisers... But Roma will be quite happy. On Warspite vs QE - Warspite has a 180 meter base advantage, before camo is applied (14.4 km vs 14.22 km).
  6. Interesting... It kinda reminds me of the Marina Militare's recent modification to the Cavour...
  7. Hello guys! Sorry for the late response, I was busy this evening, so while I was lurking, I didn't get the opportunity to make a response. I'm glad to see we got some good discussions going! @guns_at_last_light - That's an interesting idea, although I don't know how willing WG would be to put that in. Rough seas generally meant that effective speed would be reduced (feasible), pitch & roll was increased (not modeled), and spray could result in damage or generally interfering with fire control systems (such as rangefinders)... This last one I can only think of being modelled as spray showing up on your screens. However, given how random cyclones can be, and that certain nations tended to design ships to operate in specific environments, it could create odd advantages & disadvantages that players might not appreciate, especially as many dislike cyclones as it is. It also acts as an extra buff to battleships, as they generally have better stability in bad weather, and their fire control equipment is less likely to suffer from high spray or things like it. @mofton On the RoF - that's a good point, I was kicking myself for not thinking about that when I read your post! XD Gunnery practice was as SparvieroVV said. I agree 30 seconds should be where it is. It might result in worse dpm because of the lower alpha (for example, it's 18000 less potential AP dpm than North Carolina), but I think that's balanced by the incredible power of the guns @skull_122_steel - Nope, d'Aosta uses regular Italian HE (granata dirompente) for her 6" guns when firing HE. As SparvieroVV said, Italian HE had generally small bursters, which hurts them in-game. @dseehafer - agh, I forget they're listed in GM3D! My bad. However, those two sisters are so far above the rest that I don't think it makes much of a difference. @Carl I know of the formulas, and they're usually great, but I've noticed some inaccuracies in the HP ones, so I've been shying away from them a bit. For example (from another project of mine currently in the works), the cruiser HP formula gives Zara 500 less hitpoints than Chapayev... who she's 900 tons heavier than (at least, that was they math then. Looking at GM3D it seems Chapayev is 14040 tons in-game, but that's still lighter than Zara at a full load). Also, thanks for posting the AA chart, that's very useful to show off the actual effectiveness of the dps, as a lot of the time the raw numbers are misleading. The TDS... good point. My only hope is that Roma, the Littorio-class as a whole, and the rebuilds don't get docked on their values as a national flavor just because 'Pugliese' and the faults commonly associated with it. And for the decapping conversion as a whole: Anything I add at this point will be fairly redundant as much of it has already been said on it's irl functionality, but as far as in-game goes... as has been pointed out, decapping as a whole will pretty much be limited to two classes, the Littorio and Abruzzi. That's a maximum of four ships, if Garibaldi gets a spot as a premium (although d'Aosta existing makes this less likely). Granted, the Abruzzi-class would be simpler as I don't recall anything about cellulite being used in her belt. While decapping would be a very cool addition to the game, I don't see WG adding it for so few ships, although I could always be wrong. If they don't, I imagine they'd just simplify the belt down to 350mm... although it would be pretty great if they went ahead and tried to simulate the effective protection provided by the decapping scheme just using raw thickness in-game. In general, however, the system as-is albeit simplified to 350mm is powerful as it is. Remember, all the descriptions I mentioned about the shells not reaching the citadels was without considering the angle of the ship. It was only broadside, and that system only gets more effective as angles increase (not only does the effective armor thickness of various plates increase, but the distances the shells travel in-between plates increases) *edit - huh, I guess there's a limit to how many people you can call in at a time.
  8. I can't comment on Scharnhorst, but Dunkerque's AP is beautiful. Sky-high penetration! I understand why people HE spam in her, but I rarely do.
  9. Oh, my Indy & Pepsicola are soooo ready for this! Especially when it comes to shooting her in her big old bum where she can't really get you back.
  10. Awesome post, it was a fascinating read! I had never actually stopped to think about why blueprints were called 'blueprints,' but I guess I know now! It's also really cool to read some of the stories people share.
  11. World of Speculation: Roma Hello all, Phoenix here with another one of those posts where I’ll probably make myself look like a fool. Fortunately, I’ve since developed the necessary brain cells that allow me to comprehend that photobucket was a terrible choice of image hosting, so there’s that at least. Anyways, as the wiser and more cynical members of the forum may already have wondered; why in the hell am I bringing this subject up? We’ve heard nothing of Roma since the start of 2017, when it was announced in WG’s magazine that she was to come in 2017, but only after Alabama arrived (check there. Also, Graf Zeppelin was mentioned in the same place. Check?). Well, sorry to start the hype train up again, but I decided, hell, why don’t we look at Roma, and wonder: How will she appear in game? This is actually a lot more of an interesting question than most might think, as the Littorio-class had a lot of quirks that make it difficult to nail down. Fortunately, as a premium, we at least know what modifications Roma should appear with (I assume she will be represented as she was prior to her sinking). So, as usual with my analysis of ships, we’re splitting this up into categories, although I’m leaving out the historical part for this one: - Health - Armor/Protection - Firepower - AA - Speed & Maneuverability - Stealth Alright, so as I literally just mentioned, we’re not doing a historical part for this ship (Part of me thinks me saying it again is to remind myself… hmm), instead, we’ll get straight to the heart of the matter! Health: Roma, while still the same class, was built to a slightly modified design compared to her other sisters Littorio and Vittorio Veneto. Impero was to be the same. So, what was this modification? What new goodies were crammed in? Well, nothing really. There was a modification to their bows that helped their handling in rough seas, but that’s all. It just makes her overall length (note; not waterline length. It primarily gave her more freeboard) a little under three meters longer, and she comes out some tons heavier. Roma, fully loaded, comes out to a sizeable 45,485 tons. Where does that put her in relation to other tier eight battleships? Well, first let’s log out the other tier eight battleships and see where they lie relative to their health. So, as we can see, Roma comes in on the lighter end of spectrum when it comes to the dreadnoughts of tier eight. Roma is sandwiched between the two American cousins, 966 tons heavier than Alabama, but 1,215 tons behind North Carolina. Assuming the hitpoints can be used proportionally to tonnage, we can conclude that Roma should come out to roughly 64,500 hitpoints. Conclusion- While it isn’t terrible, it is on the lower end of hitpoints for ships of this tier and type, in fact below average. Still, given the scale of hitpoints we’re talking about here, being 2-3 thousand hitpoints short of many others isn’t the same difference it is on something like a cruiser or low-tier battleship. Still, this is a disadvantage. That’s surviving a few more ticks of fire or flooding, taking that extra bit of HE spam, dealing with a few more overpens… or even not dying to that last citadel. Every bit matters, but that still doesn’t make it a major disadvantage. Armor/Protection- Oh boy… so, this is one of those ‘complicated’ areas. Why? Well, with the Littorio-class, the Italians got creative with her protection. Decapping. I’ll start with the deck armor, because unbelievably that’s simpler. Note: As WG doesn’t factor in plating such as (most famously, at least on NA) the American STS, I’m not going to count the ER plating as armor. Upper Deck: 36mm <- This is basically the forecastle deck, although it extends all the way aft to the #3 barbette. Main Deck: - Magazines: 150mm over citadel, 100mm over belt - Machinery: 100mm over citadel, 90mm over belt Extremities: - Forward: 60mm from citadel fore bulkhead to foremost armored bulkhead - Aft: 100mm from citadel aft bulkhead to aftermost armored bulkhead. About half this length (towards citadel) had 36mm armor on the deck above it. The aft most end also had two sloping plates (for the steering gear) As a side note, for the combinations of the armor plates and the ER they were laminated on, the equal thickness in a single pate for the values are as following; (36mm; 42mm) (90mm; 95mm) (100mm; 107mm) (150mm; 157mm) This is roughly what how Roma’s deck armor should appear, following this code: Red: 150mm Yellow: 100mm Green: 90mm Blue: 60mm All areas within the zone marked by the black lines would have 36mm plates above them. Now, for the vertical armor (superstructure armor not listed as it’s fairly irrelevant): Citadel: Side: -280mm main belt + 70mm decapping plate over the entire citadel, inclined at 15º -36mm splinter bulkhead at 15º, 24mm bulkhead incline inward at 26º Ends: - Fore: 210mm above main deck, 100mm below - Aft: 280m above main deck, 70mm below Barbettes: - 350mm above upper deck, 280mm below (barbette #3 is an exception w/ 290mm) Primary Battery Turrets: - 350mm face (380mm?), 200mm sides & rear Extremities: - Entire length of hull above belt is 70mm thick. Two 70mm bulkheads connect these, in front of the end barbettes and main bulkheads - 70mm section of armor extending about halfway to the bow from the main belt, capped by a 60mm bulkhead - 100mm plates sloped in aft over the steering gears & propeller shafts – closed by a 200mm bulkhead This image displays the vertical armor. Note, the conning tower armor is an average. This is how she should appear in game. Purple: 350mm (Used for Belt Assembly as well) Red: 200mm Yellow: 100mm Green: 70mm Pale Green: 60mm Blue: 32mm Pale Blue: 19mm The blue areas are WG fixed values for tier VIII BBs. 32mm bow/stern, 19mm superstructure. On the Belt Armor: This… this is where it gets complicated. In order to provide better protection against more modern weapon systems (at least, those envisioned in the 1930s), a lot of innovation went into the design of the Littorio-class. One of these concepts was the decapping of Armor-Piercing shells, something reflected on both the deck and belt armor. For the deck, this was done quite simply by having multiple armored decks. For the vertical armor, this was done by creating a composite belt. The belt structure was angled at 15º, consisting of a 280mm main belt with a 70mm plate set a distance of 250mm outside. The space in-between was filled with a water-repellent cement foam called ‘cellulite.’ Directly behind the 280mm belt was 150mm of oak, with another 15mm of ER plating behind that (obviously, these would not likely be represented in-game). 1.4 meters behind that (1400mm) was a 36mm splinter bulkhead set at the same angle. Further behind that (distance varied with height, but on average was 4 meters) was a 24mm that was inclined in the opposite direction at 26º. Just behind this (distance again varies, average is probably about a meter) is the 7-9mm (ER) watertight bulkhead, beyond which would be the citadel space. Now, in game… as of now, decapping is not a thing. There is also nothing to simulate the cellulite in the composite belt. Thus, the question becomes, how will WG represent this? Will they? Or will they ignore it? In the latter case, will they leave it as is, with the non-armor portions left as empty voids? Or will they simplify the belt into a solid 350mm belt? I don’t have the answers for that. (Though they would be welcome… any help, @Sub_Octavian? J). However, in the event WG decides to leave the decapping out of the realm of possibility, it would seriously compromise the strength of the belt. Don’t get me wrong; it would still be workable. Just look at Amagi and her 254mm belt. However, at that point, the 350mm belt might be the better option. Why? Well, the belt of the Littorio-class is oddly effective in WoWs, because of the nature of her citadel. As you will shortly see, it’s rather tall. Kinda like Duca d’Aosta. However, also like the d’Aosta, it’s narrow, and all those splinter bulkheads play an interesting game with shells… and their fuses. You see, just like in real life, not only do our shells lose velocity over time in the air, but penetrating armor beats the crap out of shells. As in, knocking 400mps off their speed. Now, the 36mm and 24mm bulkheads would normally do almost nothing to slow down battleship AP – after hitting the main belt, the shells have lost so much energy that these bulkheads actually have an effect. Now, that won’t prevent the shells from ever reaching the citadel – the bulkheads still certainly won’t stop them. Well, at least if the shell lasts that long. However, that would have to mean that the AP shell can punch through all the bulkheads in just 33 milliseconds, the fuse time of the average battleship shell. You’d be amazed how often AP shells fail that test at intermediate ranges, especially when you start taking into account even light angling. Against the new British battleships, this will be even more effective, as all of them except for Warspite have only a 15 millisecond fuse time, practically a guarantee their shells will never reach the citadel of a Littorio at medium combat ranges. This isn’t a turtleback that gets more effective the closer you get… but it is something, and although you’ll still eat a ton of regular pens sitting broadside… they’re not citadels! Overall, on the way the belt is treated… If decapping does not become a feature, than I imagine there is a good chance that the result is Roma’s belt is simplified to a 350mm plate. The fact that two separate plates is inferior to a single plate of equivalent raw thickness is well documented and is true both in the real world and in World of Warships. If the decapping scheme that the Littorio-class relied upon is not to be represented in game, than I think it would only be an unfair penalty to the class to insist the belt still be kept as separate plates, creating a weakness where there shouldn’t be one. However, the judge of this is WG, so we can only wait and see. Citadel Placement: Speaking of which, that comes to a bit of a letdown when it comes to height. It’s a tall one. She’s a fast battleship, and she’s got tall machinery spaces. As a result, this is what her citadel will look like assuming no intervention on WG’s part (image includes barbettes, which are not part of citadel space in WoWs): As is plainly obvious, there’s a good chunk of citadel above the waterline. That sure as hell isn’t pretty. But hey, at least there’s a good amount of space between the sides of the ship and the citadel walls: So, it’s a mixed bag, a lot like the Duca d’Aosta, in fact. So, the next question is; how does her armor handle HE, and autobounces. Well, again, a mixed bag depending on what WG counts as armor. Against the threat of overmatch mechanics, Roma will be a decently strong ship. While the ends of the ship are vulnerable to overmatch by the 18.1” shells, in both the front (60mm) and rear (36-100mm) interior decks will prevent those shells from overmatching their way to the citadel. The hull is also quite resistant, the 70mm upper belt meaning the center of the hull is immune to overmatch, while the 70mm belt extended forward of the main belt gives extra surface towards the bow to help prevent overmatch from the Japanese 18.1” gun. The same is true aft with the 100mm plates, the result making it hard for shells coming in through either the 32mm bow or stern to reach the citadel. In terms of HE resistance, it’s a mixed bag. The 70mm upper belt makes much of the hull extremely resistant to HE alpha. Conventional HE up to 420mm (16.5”) will fail to do damage here making it impervious to almost every cruiser HE in the game. However, HE from German cruisers & BBs 283mm (11.1”) or greater will penetrate this (the same is true for British battleships). It is worth noting that the smallest conventional IFHE shell that can do damage against this is Dunkerque’s 330mm (13”) guns. For Germans Cruisers, BBs, & RN BBs, this is true for shells 220mm (8.7”) or greater. The deck armor will depend on if WG counts the 9mm plates below the 36mm upper deck (raising the thickness to 45mm). As a 36mm upper deck, it is resistant to HE of up to 210mm (8.3”), although if they use IFHE it’s only resistant against 6” (150-155mm) shells. For the ¼ pen HE shells, the base value is good enough for 6” HE to work, though IFHE won’t help the 105mm guns. For a 45mm deck, it could resist HE of up to 270mm (10.6”), and IFHE of up to 203mm (8”). Against the ¼ pen shells, it would good enough against 180mm (7”) HE, and against that type of IFHE, 139mm (5.5”). Now that we’ve covered that… well, then we have the big question when it comes to the Littorio class… Pugliese. To be honest, I’m a bit lazy, so I’m going to quote myself from a quote from February 19th, as I think it sums it up best: Hence, I would say somewhere between 20-25% would be the Roma’s torpedo damage reduction in-game… but given the wide variances in game (hi, USN BBs), who knows? Firepower: Main Guns: MMMmmmm. Here we go. Probably one of the best features of this ship. So, Roma, like all her sisters, was armed with a battery of nine 381mm/50 (15”) cannons, the most powerful 15” guns to ever be made, and one of the most powerful naval rifles, period. Although their mounts could only elevate 36º, they could fire their 884.8 kg Armor-Piercing projectiles out to a range of 42.8 km, making them the longest-range battleship guns, period. The initial muzzle velocity of these guns was 870mps, but this was dropped to 850mps in order to preserve barrel life and reduce dispersion. AP: The Armor-Piercing capabilities of the gun is incredible for the caliber, in fact having better belt penetration abilities than the famed American 16”/50 Mk.7 with WWII ammunition, and when compared with the infamous Japanese 460mm/45, actually has more penetration outside of 14 km. This is with the reduced 850mps velocity. Of course, the gun paid for this with weaker deck penetration, however, due to the shallower angles of impact. For lack of a better term, you are using something like railguns. Your arcs will be very flat, time to target rapid, making aim easy. In terms of penetration, it’s a tier X gun. Hell, it’s actually better than many tier X guns. Going by formula, it should have a maximum damage potential of 12100 damage. On an overpen, 1210 damage, while a regular penetration should result in just under 4000 damage. SAP: Yes, you heard me right. SAP. So, little known fact, Italian battleships did not carry HE (granata dirompente) rounds, although some were in development. They had AP (palla) rounds, and SAP (granata perforante) rounds. So, the question becomes, how does WG represent this? While the pure AP rounds were meant for use against battleships, the SAP rounds were to be used against lighter ships (armor-wise) such as cruisers, destroyers, and aircraft carriers. So the question becomes, what do we do with these rounds? Well, option one is to make them into HE. Really, really crappy HE, because the bursting charge is small. How small? Smaller than the bursting charges in the HE shells of Alaska. Yeah, Alaska. And her 305mm (12”) shells. Option two would be to take these shells and treat them like SAP rounds optimized for killing cruisers and destroyers (compared to the pure AP rounds). They’re lighter, weighing in at 824.3 kg, but are also fired at a higher MV (880mps), which would result in them being better at pegging faster targets. Their penetration is also much less than the pure AP, anywhere from 130-200mm less depending on the range. Taking these factors, and coupling it with a faster fuse (say, 15 milliseconds like all the British BBs with the exception of Warspite), would help make a unique trait for the Italian BB line in general, not just for Roma. It would remove the ability to sling HE, but would make it a lot easier to kill cruisers and destroyers due to the shorter fuse. It wouldn’t really be a gimmick, as instead of forcing down some sort of consumable on the ships, it’s a historically accurate flavoring, something that could be advantageous in one instance, or a disadvantage in another. Handling: How will these guns handle? Well, we can break that down into three areas. Traverse/Firing Arcs, RoF, and accuracy. Traverse & Firing Arcs: Excellent, for a battleship. The turrets of the Littorio-class traversed at a rate of 6º/sec, a value only beaten among battleships by the Scharnhorst (7.2º/sec). This is a speed many cruisers are jealous of (fun fact, this is faster than the historical traverse speeds of both IJN & USN CA’s, and matches those of MN, RM, & RN CA’s). This means your turrets will rotate 180º in 30 seconds flat, 26.87 seconds with the EM captain skill (Probably not worth taking). This is excellent news, on top of your utterly hilarious firing arcs: Just to say it bluntly if it isn’t immediately obvious: All of your guns can be brought to bear at a mere 20º angle. At which angle, any shells that hit your hull from where you’re aiming will just autobounce off. Who needs bow-on anyways? RoF: This is where it gets a bit complicated. These guns get a lot of sh*t for, despite their caliber and age, having a listed RoF on NavWeaps of 1.3 rpm. However, Navweaps really ought to add an asterisk onto that, mentioning that the RoF is 1.3 rpm at elevations of about 15º, at which point you’re firing shells at targets over 25 km away. Another important factor to keep in mind is that these guns were originally order for a rate of fire of ‘not more than 24 seconds per round.’ And going even further, if we look at gunnery exercises, we can see rate of fire numbers as low as 30.6 or 29.7 seconds. Of course, the most telling would be to rely on actual combat data to find our results, yes? Well, that’s actually what I did. The book “Struggle for the Middle Sea” By Vincent P. O’Hara gives an excellent account of the battles for control of the Mediterranean Sea during WWII, and fortunately for us, during two of the engagements involving a Littorio (specifically, both involve Vittorio Veneto), we are able to precisely pick out the time the battleship opened fire, when she ceased fire, and how many salvoes she let lose. The first instance is the Battle of Cape Spartivento, the second fleet action of the war. Vittorio Veneto entered the action a 1300, opening fire on British cruisers. They rapidly turned away as Manchester was straddled, and a 1310 Vittorio Veneto ceased fire. 10 minutes of firing in which she fired 19 salvoes. 19/10 = 1.9, aka, 31.6 second firing cycle. Later in the year, during Operation Guado (Battle of Cape Matapan resulted from this), Vittorio Veneto again found herself engaging British crusiers, opening fire at 1055.30, getting for 10 salvoes, ceasing fire for 3 minutes, and then resuming again until 1115, for a total firing time of 16 & ½ minutes, during which she fired a total of 29 salvoes. This works out to 1.76 rpm, or a 34.1 second firing cycle. So, the question is… given all of the above evidence, what reason is there to penalize her RoF? Let’s not forget, even with the incredible penetration… this is still a ship armed with 15” guns at tier VIII… that’s a hard cap on her dpm, simply because of the amount of damage her shells can do. Bismarck only has eight guns… but she’s got a mere 26 second reload, and she’s Made in German. The incoming Monarch has nine guns, like Roma. She, however, has a 25 second reload, even more rapid than Bismarck’s. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not arguing for a sub-30 second reload on Roma’s guns. But anything like what’s on Navweaps would just be ridiculous. I think a 30-34 second window makes the most sense. Secondary Battery: A weakness for Roma, at least in the game. Lacking a good DP gun in the late 1930s, the old 100mm gun being obsoleted by the new, faster generation of monoplanes coming into existence, Italy was forced to use single-purpose guns for the role of defense against small craft from the air and sea (Technically, there were AA rounds for the 6” guns… but I doubt that’ll be represented). For the anti-air role, the excellent 90mm gun was chosen. For the anti-surface role, one of the best cruiser guns Italy had would find their way onto the Littorio-class; the 152mm/55 Ansaldo Model 1934 (Roma specifically carried the M1936’s, which were produced by OTO). A powerful successor to the 152mm/53 found on earlier light cruisers (Duca d’Aosta carries these in WoWs), these guns were, wonky HE shells aside, incredibly accurate, without losing the trait of high muzzle velocity, much of this ahvng to do with the barrels being spaced farther apart in the mounts. Whereas the prior gun was dropped from 1000mps to just 850mps, this gun still fired its 50kg AP at 910mps, with dispersion of just 80-90 meters at 17.5 km. The HE shells were more troublesome (160-200 meters a the same range). To compare, Chapayev’s guns have 152 meters of dispersion at 17.33 km in-game. These guns were the main armament of the Abruzzi-class light cruisers, Italy’s most powerful light cruisers of the war. They carried ten guns in a layout mimicking that of the rebuilt Cavour and Duilio-class battleships. Roma, like her sisters, carried 12 of these guns in four triple mounts, two mounts per side. Their stats will most likely resemble this: 4x3 152mm/55 OTO Model 1936 RoF: 5 rpm (12 second reload) Range: 5.0 – 6.0 km MV: 910mps AP: 2200 This is very limited in its use. 6” AP doesn’t to a whole lot against DDs, and it’s not like one can expect to find much use against cruisers and battleships with them either, especially given the ‘accuracy’ of secondary gunners… and you’ve only got 6 to a side, and they’re not fast-firing by any stretch of the imagination. The 90mm guns, meanwhile, are single-purpose guns, although it is worth noting they were used against British destroyers in the Second Battle of Sirte, Littorio losing 21 rounds of 90mm ammunition at British destroyers as they attempted a torpedo run. In WoWs, their functionality would be rather small, however. While this could produce a decently sized fusillade of 72 to 96 rounds to a broadside, as 90mm shells they’d only have 15mm of penetration, and probably only have a maximum damage potential of 1300 damage with a 5% or less fire chance. It’s sort of a case of “I don’t see why not, but I also don’t see why.” Anti-Aircraft Firepower: And here we come to one of the weak points of Roma; her AA battery. As a premium, she is restricted by historical numbers, as oppose to tree ships that can get a-historical buffs in these areas. Roma’s AA suite was as follows: 12x1 90mm/50 OTO 1939 8x2 37mm/54 Breda 1938 4x1 37mm/54 Breda 1939 14x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 The only gun she shares with the Duca d’Aosta is the Breda 37mm cannon, which lets us get that out of the way (The singles, too, following the damage scaling ratio of 1.41 when a mount doubles the barrel count). 11.6 dps per twin mount, 8.2 dps per single. The 20mm cannons, although not in the game, fortunately are very similar to the German 20mm/65 C/38, which deals 3.0 dps as a single mount and 4.2 dps as a twin mount. Thus, Roma’s light AA works out to be: 8x2 37mm/54 - 92.8 dps @ 3.51 km 4x1 37mm/54 - 32.8 dps @ 3.51 km 14x2 20mm/65 - 58.8 dps @ 2.01 km The 90mm guns are a very different story. As a gun, it was one of the best Italian artillery pieces to be produced during the conflict, working as an excellent AA gun, and finding a role as a spectacular anti-tank gun for the Regio Esercito, more powerful even than the vaunted German 88mm/L56. The question then becomes; how does it translate into WoWs as an AA gun? The two closest guns to it are the German 88mm and French 90mm, the latter not being as good, but still useful for comparison. As a single mount, the French 90mm deals 2.7 dps @ 3.99 km, while the German 88mm gun, while not present in a single mount, would deal 5.7 dps @ 3.99 km. As the 88mm is the closest, we’re using her as the yardstick. Now, to compare, the German guns fires it’s 9.0 kg shells at 950mps, compared to the Italian gun lofting its 10.1 kg at 860mps. The RoF of the 90mm gun varies from 12 to 16 rpm (The latter the result of well-trained crews. However, it should be noted impractical numbers are used in numerous secondary/AA guns in-game, so the use of this value is not improbable). The 88mm manages 15-20 rpm. Given this, wouldn’t it seem the 88mm gun should have the dps advantage? Well, not quite. You see, when it comes to range and damage output of AA guns, factors such as fire control, stabilization, etc. For example, just look at the Soviet 130mm guns. In our case, the 90mm gun has RPC, and quadraxial stabilization. And, while I’m not expert on AA output, better knowledged forumnites such as Aetreus estimate the output of one of these guns to be about 8.0 dps @ 5.01 km As such, the total dps output of Roma would be something like (combining dps at the same ranges): 96.0 dps @ 5.01 km 125.6 dps @ 3.51 km 58.8 dps @ 2.01 km Compared to other tier VIII’ premiums, this is a solid ‘meh.’ Alabama’s AA s vastly superior, in every category. Compared to Tirpitz (not known for having fantastic AA), things are a bit more equal, the 90mm guns potential offering a range advantage at the cost of dps, and while not having nearly as much close range dps from her 20mm cannons, her mid-range fire from her 37mm cannons is vastly superior to that of the German battleship. Roma’s AA defenses will be decent, but nothing spectacular by a long shot. Speed & Maneuverability: If nothing else, the common stereotype for Italian warships, and their designers, is that they liked speed. And for that, Roma packed 128,200 hp. Her sisters, Littorio and Vittorio Veneto, both were rated at 30 knots, which they could and would make in wartime conditions. On their speed trials, both made of 31 knots (31.3 and 31.4 respectively) by pushing their machinery at a displacement of just under 42,000 tons, and it was calculated that running at maximum power (just short of 160,000 hp, although they never operated at this power in their lives) they could have made 32.2 knots at this displacement. Roma’s speed trials were never recorded, although it has been theorized by some that due to her improved bow shape, she would be able to make higher speeds than her sisters. As far as turning circle radius... These are the values given by the book “The Littorio Class: Italy’s Last and Largest battleships 1937 - 1948” for a full 360° turn; 35° angle (main rudder) @ 20kts - 885m diameter - 442.5m radius 35° angle @ 29.5kts - 935m diameter - 467.5m radius This is given for a 180° turn with a diameter of 1500m (750m radius); 9° @ 10kts 9.5° @ 14kts 11.3° @ 18kts 13.7° @ 22kts 17° @ 26kts 21° @ 30kts Then for a for a 180° turn with a diameter of 1000m (500m radius); 22.5° @ 10kts 23.5° @ 14kts 25.5° @ 18kts 29.5° @ 22kts Apparently these values could be improved by the use of the auxiliary rudders, specifically whichever one was on the inside of the turn. For the most part these are all 30-31kt Battleships (same as Littorio), although the two American BBs can only make 27.5kts. Assuming WG's figure for turning circle is with the rudder over at maximum, and at full speed, I would think Roma's maneuverability would come out to be - Maximum Speed: 30-31 knots Turning Circle Radius: 750 meters Stealth: Our final category, stealth can generally be approximated by comparing the height of ships. Usually, this is a tedious process. Roma, however, made it easy, and I was able to get this done in one comparison. This is Roma with Tirpitz superimposed over each other, corrected for length. The result is that they’re almost exactly the same, which makes it likely Roma will have a value very similar to or the same as the 16.38 km found on Bismarck and Tirpitz. This can be lowered via modules and captain skills to 12.3 km. This isn’t terrible, but it’s largely overshadowed by other ships, especially in the wake of British battleships. Here is a table of the stealth of all BBs with access to the concealment module: * Minimal detection includes camouflage, CE, and the Concealment Module. Conclusion: Roma is still a lot of unknowns. For example, the laminated armor. Will the upper deck, for example, be just 36mm? Will it be 45mm? The combined effective value of 42mm? The belt is another one. Will decapping become a thing? If not, will the structure be kept as is, or will the plates be combined to 350mm? How will thin citadel and interior bulkheads affect the ship? For example, (assuming 350mm main belt) Monarch’s 15”/45 Mk.II’s AP would fail to reach Roma’s citadel, if it was hitting Roma’s broadside at a range of just ten kilometers. 10 km. Yup, there’s a price to pay for having a short fuse. Even with Iowa’s 16” SHS, at 15 km it only has 4 milliseconds of fuse before it hits the last bulkhead, which will still result in a citadel… well, as long as Roma is still sitting broadside. However, at 17 km, it will fail to reach the citadel. Again, broadside. Compared to other BBs of tier VIII – X, she’s a ship of middling stealth and speed, unusual durability, although on the lower end of health for her tier, with sub-par to mediocre AA for such a high tier, and spectacular firepower (Albeit low alpha). Overall, although she’ll certainly be vulnerable from the air because of the low AA firepower, she ought to be a very flexible warship, capable of – well, perhaps sniping isn’t the right word, but still capable of putting the hurt on enemy battleships at very long range, taking advantage of the incredible penetrative qualities of her AP. If she’s caught at close range, she’ll have significant capability as a brawler, or at least as capable as you can be without having Made in German armor. Her turret angles, as well as their phenomenal traverse time, will give her an edge in close-range combat. At middling ranges, where her penetration will be more than enough to deal with most opponents, and while her armor might not be able to prevent damage at this range outside of autobounce, it will provide decent protection against citadels. Remember, 17 km broadside to the American 16” Mk.7. That’s one of the most powerful guns in the game, period. Her poor secondary firepower will mean that destroyers getting to close to her will be a very significant threat, ones that won’t be warded off without paying them a visit with 885 kilogram shells, and they probably won’t add much in fights against other capital ships. However, her rapid turret traverse and good angles should help against destroyers. Her speed means she should be able to get across the map rapidly, as a top speed of 30, possible even 31 knots, is pretty par for the course for tier VIII+ ships, only Iowa being clearly faster at 33 knots, while Bismarck will also have an edge with her 31 knots if Roma has just 30 knots (which I personally consider most likely). Hood also can add herself to this list, even though she’s tier VII, as she can make 32 knots. Assuming my assessment of her turning capabilities does indeed apply (which is not always the case. See Yamato) she should also be pretty good at maneuvering – someone queue the torpedobeats. If nothing else, her sisters Littorio and Vittorio Veneto left a decent precedent for it, as much of their careers consisted dodging vast quantities of torpedoes. I personally have no doubt she’ll be a solid battleship at tier VIII. However, how solid, one cannot totally call, because there is so much to question. Will the 90mm guns be secondaries? Will there be decapping? If not, will the belt be separate or merged? Will she get HE, or perhaps a special SAP? How will the laminated armor be treated? Will the 152mm guns get any AA value? How good will the 90mm guns actually be as AA? What will the range of her main guns be in-game? Why does autocorrect hate me so much? So, what do you think? How wrong am I? As always, any and all criticism is welcome, as long as it stays civil! As a side note, after Tuesday I won’t have any access to the Internet or email for the following 10 days, so I apologize in advance for anyone I don’t respond to in that timeframe. Happy Hunting! Littorio and Vittorio Veneto, her two older sisters that formed the center of the Regia Marina's battlefleet. Unlike Roma, they would be involved in numerous actions during the war.
  12. I'm sure she'll find a way to squeeze in before Roma, just like a dozen other ships we knew nothing about until they appeared this year
  13. Inb4 12+ page thread on whether Alaska should be a tier X cruiser or tier VII battleship.
  14. USS Constitution USS Intrepid USS Growler USS Midway USS Massachusetts USS Joseph P. Kennedy USS Lionfish Hiddensee HMS Belfast
  15. 'twas a different era. Back when CVs were hilariously strong, before IJN DDs had the ship kicked out if them... Before KM BBs and their turtleback, and before cruisers with smoke and weird AP. The complaints were different. Also, now they're open to a wider audience.